REPORT 26: FACTORS THAT MATCH BEST WITH THE WOMEN'S SOCCER COMMITTEE'S NCAA TOURNAMENT SEEDS AND AT LARGE SELECTIONS

The NCAA requires the Women's Soccer Committee to consider a number of criteria in making its NCAA Tournament at large selections.  The Committee also can use those criteria in seeding the bracket, but is not required to use them.  Based on the criteria, I created a list of 118 factors, some of which are the individual NCAA criteria and others of which combine those criteria in pairs with each criterion in the pair weighted at 50%.

At the end of each season, I look back over all the seasons since 2007, to see which factor, by itself, best matches the Committee decisions on seeds and at large selections from 2007 to the present.  This can be an aid for understanding how the "Committee mind" works.  It also can help teams understand what they need to schedule for and accomplish over the course of the season in order to get a seed or at large selection.

Here are the results of my look back for the years 2007 through 2023.

#1 Seeds

Each of four factors matched the Committee #1 seeds 84.4% of the time, equating to correctly matching 3.375 #1 seeds per year on average:

RPI Rating + Non-Conference RPI (NCRPI) Rank paired factor

RPI Rating + Conference Rank paired factor

RPI Rating + Top 60 Head to Head Results Score paired factor (based on head to head win-loss-tie results in games between Top 60 teams)

RPI Rating + Top 60 Head to Head Results Rank paired factor

#2 Seeds

Each of five factors matched the Committee #2 seeds 78.1% of the time, equating to correctly matching 3.125 #2 seeds per year on average (from teams remaining after the #1 seeds):

RPI Rating

RPI Rank

RPI Rating + RPI Rank paired factor

RPI Rating + Top 60 Common Opponents Results Score paired factor (based on comparing results of Top 60 teams against common opponents)

RPI Rating + Top 60 Common Opponents Results Rank paired factor

#3 Seeds

One factor matched the Committee #3 seeds 59.4% of the time, equating to correctly matching 2.375 #3 seeds per year on average (from teams remaining after the #1 and #2 seeds):

RPI Rank and Top 50 Results Rank paired factor (The Top 50 Results Score is based on good results -- wins or ties -- against Top 50 opponents and is highly skewed towards good results against very highly ranked opponents.)

#4 Seeds

One factor matched the Committee #4 seeds 56.3% of the time, equating to correctly matching 2.25 #4 seeds per year on average (from teams remaining after the #1, #2, and #3 seeds):

RPI Rank + Top 50 Results Rank paired factor

Top 16 Seeds Without Regard for Seed Position

Two factors matched the Committee's Top 16 seeds 87.5% of the time, equating to correctly matching 14 seeds per year on average:

RPI Rating + Top 60 Common Opponents Results Score paired factor

RPI Rank + Top 60 Common Opponent Results Rank paired factor

At Large Selections (from unseeded teams)

One factor matched the Committee at large selections 91.1% of the time, equating to correctly matching all but 2.06 at large selections per year on average (from teams remaining after the seeding of teams): 

RPI Rank + Conference Rank paired factor 

This was closely followed by another factor with a 90.8% match rate, equating to correctly matching all but 2.125 at large selections per year on average.  I mention this second factor because it is more useful for team scheduling purposes:

RPI Rank + Top 50 Results Rank paired factor